Jim Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 I have a question on what each setting is geared more towards. I know that the lower boundary settings are more on bass and the upper on treble, but what parts of music do they specifically focus on? Where would I focus more on for bass guitar vs. bass drum? I know it is going to be by ear, but what is each setting geared towards? 31HZ 62 125 250 500 1KHZ 2 4 8 16KHZ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 http://music.tutsplus.com/tutorials/how-to-recognize-frequencies--audio-5153 http://independentrecording.net/irn/resources/freqchart/main_display.htm 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted January 17, 2015 Share Posted January 17, 2015 Chris, You are quicker on the trigger. I was trying to figure out how to copy and paste with my HTC One M8. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 This is the most comprehensive EQ chart that I've seen, along with text descriptions of the frequency ranges of various instruments: http://www.eqchart.com/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derrickdj1 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 I have tried to make minor adjustments but, it is so hard with all the things that Auddysee, MCACC and other correction systems do to the system. Usually after a few days I change everything back. I just go with what MCACC gives which is a flat frequency respones. I find that it gives me the best sound. One thing I don't understand, Auddysee users undo so many things and yet, this is the bigdog autocorrection system. Manual EQ may works best in simple 2 ch systems not using DSP. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 Manual EQ may works best in simple 2 ch systems not using DSP. That's what I'm doing for my 2 channel set up. I was curious as to what each setting focused on. The above links are very good and I have already learned a bunch of stuff just from it. I'm actually separating my music listening from HT. So I will be running 2 separate systems. I'm putting together my TT, CD, Cassette,and Laptop with one system with a tube amp, and my AVR will now be used only for HT.This system will run with YPAO as it's my Yamaha AVR. Me understanding EQ frequencies and what they are used for will definitely help in tweaking things in 2 channel. I feel like I've had my eyes opened to what audio really is since coming on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heritage_Head Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 For basic 2ch music I would start with a smilely face eq and then go from there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) I have tried to make minor adjustments but, it is so hard with all the things that Auddysee, MCACC and other correction systems do to the system. Usually after a few days I change everything back. I just go with what MCACC gives which is a flat frequency respones. I find that it gives me the best sound. One thing I don't understand, Auddysee users undo so many things and yet, this is the bigdog autocorrection system. Manual EQ may works best in simple 2 ch systems not using DSP. With the modern correction systems being so good, this is where I always start. I run mcacc a couple times making notes and listening to see if one run is better than another. After finding a baseline, I take those measurement/settings to a second channel and begin to manually adjust to taste for 2 channel... then I do it again for Home Theater. This leaves me with several unused channels (6total channels) that I can use to customize. Right now, I am using three total channels... one, mcacc unchanged... two, mcacc manually adjusted for deeper bass... three, mcacc with eq flat. These three channels cover pretty much all my listening by where I can swit h between them to compensate for poor recordings... 99% of my listening is done in mcacc manually eq'ed. Edited January 18, 2015 by Schu 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeydeal Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Your music would be better served with no equalizer at all. I know I am going to be crucified for suggesting such a thing in this forum, but I stand by it. Focus more on ancillaries such as good equipment, speaker/listener position and room treatment. This will reap dividends in good sound that is free of electronic artifacts that more processing adds. Shakey 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube fanatic Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Jim, I'll take the counterpoint and ask why you want to bother using an equalizer in the 2 channel system. The best sound is always obtained by having the fewest powered electronic devices in the signal path as they add all kinds of artifacts no matter how good their quality. Better results are often obtained by simply making minor adjustments in speaker placement such as distance to the rear wall (especially true for your RF-25s), and toe-in relative to your listening position. Even adding or removing innocent items like books from nearby book cases can have a noticeable effect depending on the listening level. I have often demonstrated how electronics affects sound by replacing preamps, as one example, with a passive line stage. Even non-audiophiles were able to hear a distinct difference. Maynard Looks like Shakey and I were simultaneously thinking the same thing! Edited January 18, 2015 by tube fanatic 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Guys - do you use phono preamps? You're using 40 dB or more of equalization. When you switch out tube amplifiers and the timbre of your loudspeakers sounds different, you're using amplifiers as poor equalizers. Virtually all preamps have graphic equalizers built-in nowadays or they have "tone controls" in the older units from yesteryear. These are equalizers. Jim - equalizers are essential to good sound, as well as in-room measurements of the system, both of which that Schu and others use in their preamps in their two channel or multichannel systems. Multichannel sound systems make superb two-channel systems. I use active crossovers with equalization in every channel of my system (see my profile) and the results are spectacular. The quality of equalizer units can vary in sound quality, but their essential purpose does not. Chris 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeydeal Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Oh here we go. Tube amps color the sound so much they are equalizers? Maybe some do, but not any I have ever owned. The closest I have heard come to this is an old Marantz 8B. tubefanatic, we are of the same mind. Hurrah! Shakey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Richard Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Every tube amp acts as an EQ because of the (relatively) high output impedance of tube amps. Basically, a voltage divider is formed with the loudspeaker's varying impedance determining the voltage going to the speaker. This creates an uncontrolled EQ which may or may not sound pleasing to the listener. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Hey... While were at it crossovers equalize I try and use as little in the signal path as possible... But one thing I demand is being able to control tone to my liking. As long as imaging ,resolution, grain are not affected... Who cares. Edited January 18, 2015 by Schu 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris A Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) Mark, perhaps Chad should re-institute a by-invitation-only closed "BS forum" for these type of discussions. I recommend starting a new thread elsewhere out of courtesy to the OP if you are arguing that EQ should be used at all. I know where I stand having spent a lot of time with Roy and others that I respect on this subject. I can see why you don't own loudspeakers for very long before becoming dissatisfied - especially Klipsch loudspeakers. Chris Edited January 18, 2015 by Chris A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Posted January 18, 2015 Author Share Posted January 18, 2015 I appreciate everyone's responses, and even if they aren't all stating the same, it has helped me understand what my original question was. I have not added an "external eq" into my system, the eq I have been playing around with for different sounds is through Windows Media Player. The way my set up is now for 2 channel, it's the computer running to a DAC and then into the amp and out to my speakers. If I do use the cd, or cassette, they are being plugged into the amp after unplugging the computer. So they are connected directly and the cd and cassette have no adjustable eq. Up until recently within the last year or so, I always had the 2 knob bass/treble eq with the receivers so I usually always turned them both up to max settings as I like a deep bass but also a crisp high.Now that I have evolved my audio equipment,and listening I'm seeing many different ways available to listen to things. With the computer and with uploading my music to it, some does lack in areas as others don't.So to compensate if doing so, I wanted to know what each band does help compensate. I do agree with both sides in certain instances and see the benefits on having the adjustments as well as having them neutral. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJkizak Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 At the present time (Denon X-4000) listening to the local FM HD radio station in PLIIx mode I have ended up with tone control off, MFE + sub at "0", Dynamic at "0", all speakers at "0" tone, and graphic equalizer set on center and right and left speakers to -5db at 4khz and -4db at 8khz. These settings reduced the voice hacking/hash inflections on some of the "worser" recordings. I believe some of this is caused by the stations's compressors which seem to go bananas on some complex frequencies. I get none of this on DVD's, Bluray's and TV inputs. Unbelievably the commercials on the FM HD station are dead perfect and crystal clear. JJK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schu Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 (edited) How about this... Some people just do not want a "tube" sound. Lets have a meaningless discussion about that. Id bet that topic is even more polarizing and a much harder pill to swallow Edited January 18, 2015 by Schu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Your music would be better served with no equalizer at all. I know I am going to be crucified for suggesting such a thing in this forum, but I stand by it. Focus more on ancillaries such as good equipment, speaker/listener position and room treatment. This will reap dividends in good sound that is free of electronic artifacts that more processing adds. Shakey Got to agree with Shakey on this one. Roger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max2 Posted January 18, 2015 Share Posted January 18, 2015 Your music would be better served with no equalizer at all. I know I am going to be crucified for suggesting such a thing in this forum, but I stand by it. Focus more on ancillaries such as good equipment, speaker/listener position and room treatment. This will reap dividends in good sound that is free of electronic artifacts that more processing adds. Shakey Not from me. Im in total agreement as well. Im not going to say someone can't manually EQ a system to sound better to their ears or get a flatter room response on paper, I am saying I cant do it with AydysseyXT32 or a manual EQ without smearing details and altering the original content to be something it never was in the beginning. I don't believe in modifying the music with boosts, cuts and time mods from reverb or echo with digital filters. Preserve the original content like it was intended, just correct your listening room..... panels and traps work! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.